English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

is nuclear energy our only real alternative..?

2006-06-05 11:44:06 · 7 answers · asked by notgnal 6 in Politics & Government Government

7 answers

Hardly. Methane, ethanol (not yet for cars but already viable for power plants), vegetable oil etc. If we really had to stop burning fossil fuel, the current service stations could distribute the new fuel. One of the problems with bringing out alternate fuels is that in order to 'compete' with gasoline, it has to be reasonably available to people driving across the country. Distribution is a tough issue for some of the products.

2006-06-05 11:49:52 · answer #1 · answered by DAR 7 · 1 0

www.permanentenergy.com shows a pollution free way around Nuclear or any other fueled process for electric power. Being fuel-less this would be the cheapest electricity ever. Fueled power plants use over $30 billion in fuel over a life time. Nuclear has a 25,000 year storage problem for the spent fuel. That spent fuel will cost over $30 billion a year for 25,000 years. So when the bill for Nuclear power really comes due it will be $500 a kwh. Do you really want $500 kwh electricity? The Permanent Energy power will be.05c kwh. and it's pollution free. Which would you want?

2006-06-05 16:23:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

OIl will effect transportation mainly. Almost all electric plants are ran on coal, hydroelectric, and existing nuclear power.

Coal can be replaced by biomass pyrolytic tablets, which can be produced from any biomass material cheaply. Look at a corn field after harvest this comming fall. All of that stuff left on the ground could power the nation many times over.

2006-06-07 11:33:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Of course not!

The only reason that it is an option is because of the potential profit from it.

Most alternative scources could be used on a small local scale and the only large profit would be in the initial manufacturing and installation stage plus there would be no military weapons produced [nukes] as a by product.

2006-06-09 07:30:53 · answer #4 · answered by Ben C 3 · 0 0

No. There are other ways of creating renewable energy. Hydrogen, Ethanol, methanol, solar power, wind power, hydroelectric, biomass, Veg. Oil. There are many ways of creating energy. The government just needs to get out of the back pocket of the oil industry!Cold Fusion is the key!

2006-06-05 12:02:21 · answer #5 · answered by Gonzo13 2 · 0 0

Wind, wave, micro turbines, hydro, solar, biomass..

The problem with nuclear is that when they calculate the cost they never include the decomissioning cost so everytime the government roll out the "cost per KwH" or any other number, its always flawed and appears cheaper than it really is to the tune of £100bn per power station..

Seriously, lots and lots of small power generators and less consumption are the way forward!

Check out:
http://www.greenfutures.org.uk/

2006-06-05 11:51:15 · answer #6 · answered by hongkongphooey 5 · 0 0

no longer probably because of the fact whether they are shaped from organic forces (photosynthesis) they have been locked away for tens of millions of years in mineral formations, so are no longer seen renewable like bio-mass.

2016-12-13 14:43:52 · answer #7 · answered by karg 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers